Atheist Nexus2016-12-09T17:59:11ZGeorgehttp://atheistnexus.org/profile/George57http://api.ning.com/files/m3kRA-aqkq8SVLiSLwLFAlYL*ot63JOiCyk0ok4jYXmEqKe*f3SEZdUrCA-dcclodTTdf90IBJgVkejr10eT3N7cYBV6wb3O/spiral_pastelmed.jpg?width=48&height=48&crop=1%3A1http://atheistnexus.org/group/atheistcinema/forum/topic/listForContributor?user=1tffm4if16wdk&feed=yes&xn_auth=noPredictions in Science Fiction moviestag:atheistnexus.org,2016-08-31:2182797:Topic:27070672016-08-31T18:18:06.693ZGeorgehttp://atheistnexus.org/profile/George57
<p>I just watched the 1956 movie "Forbidden Planet" for the 11th time. I think this is the first time that I noticed it's predictions of the dates of accomplishments were in the opposite direction of most Science Fiction movie predictions that I've seen.</p>
<p>Most predictions are off by being optimistic. That is, by predicting events much sooner than they happen in real life. I do this also. I'm usually too optimistic in predicting when mankind will accomplish new things in science and…</p>
<p>I just watched the 1956 movie "Forbidden Planet" for the 11th time. I think this is the first time that I noticed it's predictions of the dates of accomplishments were in the opposite direction of most Science Fiction movie predictions that I've seen.</p>
<p>Most predictions are off by being optimistic. That is, by predicting events much sooner than they happen in real life. I do this also. I'm usually too optimistic in predicting when mankind will accomplish new things in science and technology.</p>
<p>However, in "Forbidden Planet", they say men went to the moon in 2090, 121 years after we did it. Only 13 years after the movie was released.</p>
<p>They say we explored the rest of the Solar System by 2200, which sounds about 130 years after we will probably do it.</p>
<p>The final two predictions is that we achieved Hyperdrive (traveling at the speed of light) in 2210, and later greatly surpassed it.</p>
<p>I don't know how accurate those two predictions will be. I think we will approach the speed of light sooner than they predicted, but we may never surpass it.</p>
<p>What's your opinion on this movie's predictions, and/or others?</p> The Unbelieverstag:atheistnexus.org,2013-05-27:2182797:Topic:22419222013-05-27T15:34:57.775ZGeorgehttp://atheistnexus.org/profile/George57
<p>As it comes to "atheist cinema," I seriously doubt you could get any more atheist than this:<br></br><br></br><br></br><iframe frameborder="0" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/ZxDLkoK8vQQ?wmode=opaque" width="560"></iframe>
<br></br><br></br><br></br>To quote from <em>The Unbelievers</em> <a href="http://www.unbelieversmovie.com/" target="_blank">website</a>:<br></br><br></br><em>'The Unbelievers' follows renowned scientists Richard Dawkins and Lawrence Krauss across the globe as they speak publicly about the…</em></p>
<p>As it comes to "atheist cinema," I seriously doubt you could get any more atheist than this:<br/><br/><br/><iframe width="560" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/ZxDLkoK8vQQ?wmode=opaque" frameborder="0"></iframe>
<br/><br/><br/>To quote from <em>The Unbelievers</em> <a href="http://www.unbelieversmovie.com/" target="_blank">website</a>:<br/><br/><em>'The Unbelievers' follows renowned scientists Richard Dawkins and Lawrence Krauss across the globe as they speak publicly about the importance of science and reason in the modern world - encouraging others to cast off antiquated religious and politically motivated approaches toward important current issues.</em><br/><br/>I've checked imdb.com on the film. All it says regarding a release date is "2013," nothing further than that. Apparently there has been at least pre-release screening which was met very positively.<br/><br/>Also worthy of note is that there are guest appearances in <em>The Unbelievers</em> by a notable array of our more illustrious compatriots, including but not at all limited to Woody Allen, Ricky Gervais, Bill Maher, Tim Minchen, and Sam Harris.<br/><br/>Frankly, it looks like a great deal of fun ... for US, anyway. What the believers may think about it is left as an exercise for the student!</p> I've Just Published a New Book, the "Freethought Resource Guide" Which Might be Helpful Heretag:atheistnexus.org,2013-02-02:2182797:Topic:21566312013-02-02T21:52:29.981ZGeorgehttp://atheistnexus.org/profile/George57
<p>I am the author of the recently published "Freethought Resource Guide: A Directory of Information, Literature, Art, Organizations, and Internet Sites Related to Secular Humanism, Skepticism, Atheism, and Agnosticism". In the book there is a section devoted film. I just found this discussion group and am going to check out all of your suggestions. Some of my favorites include: "The Invention of Lying" "The Man Who Sued God" "The Turman Show" and nearly everything by Monty Python for comedy.…</p>
<p>I am the author of the recently published "Freethought Resource Guide: A Directory of Information, Literature, Art, Organizations, and Internet Sites Related to Secular Humanism, Skepticism, Atheism, and Agnosticism". In the book there is a section devoted film. I just found this discussion group and am going to check out all of your suggestions. Some of my favorites include: "The Invention of Lying" "The Man Who Sued God" "The Turman Show" and nearly everything by Monty Python for comedy. "Atheism: A Rought History of Disbelief" "The Tillman Story" "Thomas Paine: The Most Valuable Englishman Ever" Cosmos" and "Jesus Camp' for a few documentaries. For some good drama check out "Agora" "Creation" "Inherit the Wind" "Ikiru" "Madame Curie" "You Don't Know Jack" and a whole lot more. Thanks for the group.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>The book is now available on Amazon in paperback and ebook. I hope it will help educate and empower the freethought community. Please check it out through my website <a href="http://freethoughtguide.com">http://freethoughtguide.com</a>.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>Praise for "Freethought Resource Guide"</p>
<p> </p>
<p>“Mark Vandebrake has created a one of a kind work. This is a book to explore, think about, read pieces here and there, learn new methods and explore ideas. I cannot imagine the effort that went into this project. It is monumental. The "Freethought Resource Guide" is a deep mine in which you will find many gold nuggets. You could spend a lifetime exploring the resources compiled here. The Freethought Movement now has a single source for all things secular.”</p>
<p> </p>
<p>-Dr. Darrel W. Ray, author of "Sex and God," and "The God Virus," founder and Chairman of the board for Recovering from Religion</p>
<p> </p>
<p>Thanks so much for your time. I hope you don't mind me posting about this.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>Take care,</p>
<p>Mark Vandebrake</p> Cloud Atlastag:atheistnexus.org,2012-09-07:2182797:Topic:20469822012-09-07T15:19:12.549ZGeorgehttp://atheistnexus.org/profile/George57
<p>So ... I'm retrieving my Yahoo mail and seeing in a promo something new with Tom Hanks in it. I LIKE Tom Hanks and his work ... a LOT, and being that there's a link to a trailer in the piece, I click on it ... and run headlong into THIS:</p>
<p></p>
<p><iframe frameborder="0" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/xKZj6lA9ICs?wmode=opaque" width="560"></iframe>
</p>
<p></p>
<p>Boys and girls, make sure your seat belts are fastened and return your seat backs and tray tables to the…</p>
<p>So ... I'm retrieving my Yahoo mail and seeing in a promo something new with Tom Hanks in it. I LIKE Tom Hanks and his work ... a LOT, and being that there's a link to a trailer in the piece, I click on it ... and run headlong into THIS:</p>
<p></p>
<p><iframe width="560" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/xKZj6lA9ICs?wmode=opaque" frameborder="0"></iframe>
</p>
<p></p>
<p>Boys and girls, make sure your seat belts are fastened and return your seat backs and tray tables to the full upright and locked position ... 'cuz the Wachowski boys is at it agin!</p> Documentary: "8: The Mormon Proposition"tag:atheistnexus.org,2012-07-29:2182797:Topic:20166302012-07-29T19:51:37.203ZGeorgehttp://atheistnexus.org/profile/George57
<p>When the voters of California decided to make legal same sex marriage in that state, they put a ballot initiative ("proposition") in action and obtained a majority of voters to make it happen. Immediately, upon its passage into law, gay and lesbian couples flocked to courthouses, obtained marriage licenses, and had their vows solumnised by, e.g. San Francisco Mayor Gavin Newsome. But the joy the couples felt was short-lived. In reaction to the new law, the Mormon Church, representing only…</p>
<p>When the voters of California decided to make legal same sex marriage in that state, they put a ballot initiative ("proposition") in action and obtained a majority of voters to make it happen. Immediately, upon its passage into law, gay and lesbian couples flocked to courthouses, obtained marriage licenses, and had their vows solumnised by, e.g. San Francisco Mayor Gavin Newsome. But the joy the couples felt was short-lived. In reaction to the new law, the Mormon Church, representing only 2% of the electorate, sought out "pro-family" political action groups such as the National Organization for Marriage (NOM), to which Mitt Romney contributed ten grand, and which, along with other bigoted organizations, willingly became a front coalition to hide the fact that almost all of the money behind Proposition 8 came from the Church of the Latter-Day Halfwits. The Mormons' sneaky, underhanded participation in this denial of human rights is the subject of a fine documentary, <em>8: The Mormon Proposition</em>, which you can stream online at the following url: <a href="https://123vidz.com/pages/flowplayer?a_aid=4dd3eee6d1d03&amp;a_bid=72491354&amp;chan=hd">https://123vidz.com/pages/flowplayer?a_aid=4dd3eee6d1d03&amp;a_bid=72491354&amp;chan=hd</a></p>
<p>No matter what your sexual orientation or your opinion of marriage equality, you will hopefully enjoy seeing just how sinister and mean-spirited Mormons are. The movie shows how the "Twelve Apostles" (church fathers at the top of the Ponzi Scheme) brow beat their congregants into contributing vast sums of money to obtain a slight majority of voters to push Prop 8 through. In one incredible scene, for example, a Mormon family with five male children withdrew their life savings of $50K and sent it to the coalition. (Although they are not seen in the film, Tony Perkins' Family Research Council almost went bankrupt funding their own drive to deprive sexual minorities of rights enjoyed by heterosexuals.) A particularly dismal sequence depicts the McCarthy-like pogroms against gay students at Brigham Young University, whose administration asked the entire student body to seek "out" classmates (pun intended) and turn them in so that behavior modification techniques -- read: torture -- could be employed to force them into admitting they were gay or face expulsion. The most incredible sequence, however, shows bigoted Utah legislator <span class="st">Chris “Strom” Buttars (guess where he got the nick?), a physically repulsive homophobe of unbelievable nastiness and cruelty confront a gay activist with snarly snarking replies to questions about equality.</span></p>
<p><span class="st">The prime minister of England knew exactly what he was talking about when he commented on Romney's Salt Lake Olympics and, comparing them to London's, referred to the former as sporting events "in the middle of nowhere." Religion poisons everything, and this documentary proves it again and again.<a target="_self" href="http://api.ning.com:80/files/tXdqT2BitMjHEUoncJOlVklyVbas*JeIu2HQNvQnWnt1alo4hlaOxASthn9hNMerFj5cp4AnIXuajcb8yVg-AQlb144oRfXk/oBANECAPITALROMNEY570.jpg"><img class="align-full" src="http://api.ning.com:80/files/tXdqT2BitMjHEUoncJOlVklyVbas*JeIu2HQNvQnWnt1alo4hlaOxASthn9hNMerFj5cp4AnIXuajcb8yVg-AQlb144oRfXk/oBANECAPITALROMNEY570.jpg" width="570"/></a><br/></span></p> Prometheus?tag:atheistnexus.org,2012-06-16:2182797:Topic:19835812012-06-16T19:47:12.789ZGeorgehttp://atheistnexus.org/profile/George57
<p>Absolutely brilliant - or absolute disaster?</p>
<p><strong>Spoiler Warning</strong></p>
<p>Screen Rant has some interesting discussions - particularly the spoilers - and I expect that we'll get spoilers here so <strong><em>if you haven't see it yet, please, please don't join in until you have.</em></strong></p>
<p>For me I went in expecting to be awed and came out wanting to strangle the screenwriter with his own entrails.</p>
<p>Absolutely brilliant - or absolute disaster?</p>
<p><strong>Spoiler Warning</strong></p>
<p>Screen Rant has some interesting discussions - particularly the spoilers - and I expect that we'll get spoilers here so <strong><em>if you haven't see it yet, please, please don't join in until you have.</em></strong></p>
<p>For me I went in expecting to be awed and came out wanting to strangle the screenwriter with his own entrails.</p> Moneyballtag:atheistnexus.org,2012-04-22:2182797:Topic:19329402012-04-22T03:05:22.513ZGeorgehttp://atheistnexus.org/profile/George57
<p>A couple days ago, on a lark, I rented <i>Moneyball</i>, the 2011 film starring Brad Pitt as Billy Beane, General Manager of the Oakland Athletics. The A’s have just come off a credible season, though losing to the Yankees in the ALCS. Insult is added to injury here as they also lose several of their key players, and the owner is unable / unwilling to part with additional funds to reach for “name” talent. Meantime, the scouts who are supposed to find diamonds in the rough to replace…</p>
<p>A couple days ago, on a lark, I rented <i>Moneyball</i>, the 2011 film starring Brad Pitt as Billy Beane, General Manager of the Oakland Athletics. The A’s have just come off a credible season, though losing to the Yankees in the ALCS. Insult is added to injury here as they also lose several of their key players, and the owner is unable / unwilling to part with additional funds to reach for “name” talent. Meantime, the scouts who are supposed to find diamonds in the rough to replace heavyweights like Jason Giambi argue back and forth about players who don’t look good, are getting pudgy or have an odd throwing action. Into this mix, Beane throws Peter Brand, a Yale graduate and economist, who seems to have distilled a method of quantizing performance, based on the ideas of one Bill James, down to ONE statistic: On Base Percentage. With that as a primary benchmark, and in spite of the resistance from scouts and manager Art Howe, Beane and Brand assemble a team which, in theory, can tackle opponents like the Yankees, whose payroll is at least three times larger, and WIN.<br/><br/>The reason I’m writing about this movie is the whole issue of subjective vs. objective. To listen to the scouts talk, the game is all about intangibles, about intuition and instinct and impression. Certainly statistics enter into the equation, but they may be no more important in some eyes than facial features or some particular aspect of a player’s batting motion. Beane’s attitude in the midst of all of this hand-waving flies directly in the face of these traditions. It is utterly objective and results-oriented. He is about numbers and applications, quantifiable performance figures which correlate to that all-important statistic: Wins.<br/><br/>I cannot help but associate Beane’s experience on the baseball field with our experience with theists. They want to talk in abstract, subjective, metaphysical terms of feeling and personal experience and so on. We want to deal in FACT, what is demonstrable, what has a high correlation to a desired result, what gives a predictable and desirable outcome. Listening to the coaches and scouts in the conference room early in the game sounded as much like WOO as the crap we get from evangelicals. There are a lot of pretty-sounding words, supposedly backed up by years of experience, but boiled down, it may amount to no more than a lot of sound and fury, signifying not bloody much.<br/><br/>I was disappointed at the end of the film to learn that Billy Beane didn’t take the GM job at Boston. I was pleased though to learn that Boston took what they learned of Beane’s technique, pressed it into service, and won themselves a World Series. Certainly, theories such as what Beane and Brand were using are not iron-clad guarantees for success … but when a team with a $39 million payroll can compete with teams who pay one player roughly that much, someone should take note.<br/><br/>By the same token, religion has gone on largely unchanged for a lot longer than Abner Doubleday’s game has been around, but when that status quo is challenged long enough and successfully enough, eventually, someone is going to pay attention … and start looking at the stats.</p> Real Steeltag:atheistnexus.org,2012-04-21:2182797:Topic:19323842012-04-21T18:33:01.272ZGeorgehttp://atheistnexus.org/profile/George57
<p>Fifty years ago, Richard Matheson wrote a piece entitled, “Steel,” for the television series, <i>The Twilight Zone</i>. It tells the story of manager and ex-boxer Sam “Steel” Kelly, played by Lee Marvin, who handles a washed-up B-2 robot boxer named Battling Maxo. Maxo needs parts badly to continue fighting, and indeed, the robot is in no condition to match up in the next contest it is scheduled for. Kelly knows this all too well, but the fight game is in his blood and his heart. He…</p>
<p>Fifty years ago, Richard Matheson wrote a piece entitled, “Steel,” for the television series, <i>The Twilight Zone</i>. It tells the story of manager and ex-boxer Sam “Steel” Kelly, played by Lee Marvin, who handles a washed-up B-2 robot boxer named Battling Maxo. Maxo needs parts badly to continue fighting, and indeed, the robot is in no condition to match up in the next contest it is scheduled for. Kelly knows this all too well, but the fight game is in his blood and his heart. He could no more quit than stop breathing, nor will he. Instead, he will mask himself with enough of his mechanical combatant as he can and go into the ring himself. No surprise, he is beaten badly, but the appearance fee for the fight will pay for trigger springs and oil paste, maybe just enough to get Battling Maxo working and fighting again. This was a memorable episode, one of the best <i>The Twilight Zone</i> ever produced.<br/><br/>Fast forward half a century and we find the movie, <i>Real Steel</i>, based on the same Matheson story. The names have changed; Hugh Jackman is boxing manager Charlie Kenton and there are additional plot points and back story, which include Charlie’s checkered past and an abandoned and forgotten son. Also, the automatons who fight now are huge metal behemoths that no man could survive in a ring encounter. Charlie has leveraged the rediscovery of his son in order to get enough scratch to get back in the fight game after his last robot was trashed … by a <i>bull!</i> His new acquisition looks promising, but mostly owing to Charlie’s less-than-thoughtful management style, gets reduced to spare parts. Crawling back from that loss, Charlie and his son stumble onto a sparring robot – “Atom” – with a surprising feature: the ability to perfectly mimic or “shadow” the movements of another. This ability is first used as pre-fight entertainment, but later comes into critical usage in a fight which seems like mechanized recreation of the first Rocky Balboa – Apollo Creed brawl. After a fashion, Charlie Kenton is almost as much in the ring as Lee Marvin was 50 years before him.<br/><br/>Ultimately, <i>Real Steel</i> is not enough grit, too much feel-good and too much Disney for me, and I have a tough time recommending as is. However, it at least tries to maintain some fidelity to the original idea Richard Matheson penned for Rod Serling’s classic series. Whoever came up with the idea of the “shadow” function deserves a tip of the cap, along with the idea that robot fighters had gotten away from human pugilistic techniques. This oversight leaves an opening as blatant as not keeping up your left, an opening filled by the combination of Charlie Kenton’s boxing savvy and Atom’s mimicry.<br/><br/><i>Real Steel</i> doesn’t quite work for me … but a little tweaking and maybe it could have.</p> How an Iranian film unites us all (CNN)tag:atheistnexus.org,2012-02-21:2182797:Topic:18652532012-02-21T12:49:45.171ZGeorgehttp://atheistnexus.org/profile/George57
<p><em>Editor's note: John Anderson is a film critic for Variety and The Wall Street Journal, and a contributor to The New York Times. He is the author of "Sundancing" (2000) and "I Wake Up Screening" (2006).</em></p>
<p>(CNN) -- When Iranian director Asghar Farhadi accepted his Golden Globe for best foreign film last month, he spoke a few words of thanks, paused and announced he wanted to say something about his people. Two nations held their breath.</p>
<p>"They are a peace-loving people,"…</p>
<p><em>Editor's note: John Anderson is a film critic for Variety and The Wall Street Journal, and a contributor to The New York Times. He is the author of "Sundancing" (2000) and "I Wake Up Screening" (2006).</em></p>
<p>(CNN) -- When Iranian director Asghar Farhadi accepted his Golden Globe for best foreign film last month, he spoke a few words of thanks, paused and announced he wanted to say something about his people. Two nations held their breath.</p>
<p>"They are a peace-loving people," Farhadi said, and then was gone. Brief though it was, his comment was eloquent, to the point and unsettling in its simplicity.</p>
<p>Likewise his movie. Much of the reason that "A Separation" has made such an impact in the West -- a virtual sweep of the critics' prizes, a Golden Globe and two Oscar nominations, including a virtually unheard of nod for a non-U.S. screenplay -- is that it isn't a foreign film at all (except for all that Farsi).</p>
<p>If anything, it's a feel-good movie, albeit in a wildly perverse way: Having experienced the anguish of Farhadi's characters, the viewer comes away with the inescapable sense of our common humanity, the resounding sense that we're all in this life together. If that sounds clichéd, so be it.</p>
<p>This is not a politically acceptable position, of course.</p>
<p>Amid the glib militarism of Republican presidential candidates, the bellicosity of Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and the nuclear recklessness of the mullahs, "A Separation" drives home the oft-ignored fact that Iran is full of educated, sophisticated and cultured people who don't necessarily agree with their government either. Particularly the lead characters of "A Separation."</p>
<p>Farhadi doesn't ask for trouble. No one in the cast declares that, "Our impossible, infuriatingly theocratic regime is anti-intellectual, anti-opportunity, anti-woman, anti-freedom, anti-human." Nevertheless, Simin (Leila Hatami) wants out. A young mother of Tehran's educated middle-class, she wants a better life for her daughter, Termeh (played by the director's daughter, Sarina Farhadi) and -- why not? -- a better life for herself.</p>
<p>She works, she takes classes, she harbors an intellectual curiosity. Under her hijab, her hair is dyed an unnatural but quite chic shade of red, which more or less reflects her disposition. She is adamant. She's going, whether her husband, Nader, is willing or not. And he's not. His father is suffering from dementia and can't be left behind. And, as Islamic law demands that the husband decides where the daughter goes, Termeh is staying, too.</p>
<p>Without giving away the whole plot, it's worth saying that "A Separation" snowballs into a demi-tragedy propelled by institutional hubris: Simin is judged by the system to have insufficient grounds for divorce, but what can happen otherwise when the grounds for her request are the very system that is denying her the divorce?</p>
<p>Nader, needing to find a housekeeper who can care for his father while he goes to work, rashly hires Razieh (Sareh Bayat), a woman so fearful of religious impropriety that she has to call for a ruling before she can change the incontinent old man out of his soggy clothes. That she cannot touch Nader's father, played by Ali-Asghar Shahbazi, lest she violate some religious tenet, verges on the absurdly comedic. The series of misunderstandings and various acts of dishonesty that intertwine so gracefully and with such a dreadful sense of destiny, are all predicated on a system that denies reality.</p>
<p>Read the rest <a href="http://www.cnn.com/2012/02/20/opinion/anderson-iranian-film/index.html?hpt=hp_bn4" target="_blank">here</a>.</p>
<p></p>
<p>====================</p>
<p></p>
<p>I'll admit to not being a great "small film" or "significant film" person. Give me my "Inception" and "Iron Man" and "Sherlock Holmes" and I'm fine, most times. Still, I saw this story on the CNN.com home page this morning and thought, "what the heck," and now I'm curious to see "A Separation" and what this Iranian filmmaker has brought to the screen.</p>
<p>As it is, I have a friend on another board who lives in Iran. She somehow made it through the madness of the last election and sees very clearly through the BS or Ahmadinejad, Khamenei, and the mullahs, though she like her peers is largely impotent to do anything about them. I haven't heard from her in a while and I worry ... and I wonder if a film like this can make a difference, not just for us, but for them.</p> The Ledge (2011)tag:atheistnexus.org,2011-07-31:2182797:Topic:14782592011-07-31T15:27:15.498ZGeorgehttp://atheistnexus.org/profile/George57
<p>I heard about this movie while listening to an interview with the writer/director on a podcast called 'The Skeptic's Guide to the Universe.'</p>
<p> </p>
<p>The description given on IMDB: A police officer looks to talk down a young man lured by his lover's husband to the ledge of a high rise, where he has one hour to contemplate a fateful decision. </p>
<p> </p>
<p>I don't want to say too much about it and give anything away, it's really something you just need to watch unfold. And for the…</p>
<p>I heard about this movie while listening to an interview with the writer/director on a podcast called 'The Skeptic's Guide to the Universe.'</p>
<p> </p>
<p>The description given on IMDB: A police officer looks to talk down a young man lured by his lover's husband to the ledge of a high rise, where he has one hour to contemplate a fateful decision. </p>
<p> </p>
<p>I don't want to say too much about it and give anything away, it's really something you just need to watch unfold. And for the love of little turtles, don't watch the trailer first, it gives far too much away.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>It's mainly the clash of an atheist and a Christian, with some spectacular debates between them that don't pander to stereotypes. And despite the film being written by an atheist, the character is not idealized, he's a very flawed human being. The christian side is pretty fairly portrayed as well. It's one of the best atheistic films I've ever seen, with some thundering emotional moments.</p>